Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

To Pave or Not to Pave?

John had warned us that the City of Anna Maria would require that our new driveway allow for sufficient rainwater drainage. But until last week, we hadn’t realized that the drainage solution would cost us $3,395 above the cost of building the driveway. That was the estimate from Adkins Contracting, a city-approved firm that installs drainage pipe.

Here is the back story:

Anna Maria has strict regulations about drainage because it is an island at sea level, and heavy rains — like those we have in the summer — can create big problems. Every homeowner is required to make sure that runoff flows into drainage areas (and does not make a lake in the middle of the street).

According to the city, if we pave our driveway — even with a permeable material — we will have to fork over the $3,000 to install a pipe to take water flowing past our house to the drainage ditch that abuts our property.

But, if we leave the driveway natural — covered by crushed shells — we don’t need to install a pipe at all.

John thinks we’ll be happier with pavers. But, given the expense, he’s come up with another plan. We will pave just our property, and when we get to the city-owned property near the street, we will fill it with “250-grade sand” (a porous material) and cover that with shells. Essentially, this means we won’t have to install the drainage pipe.

Clearly, it’s not an ideal solution from an aesthetic point of view, but economically John’s idea makes sense to us. And there’s always the possibility that the city will install its own pipe, at which point we can finish paving.

Are we cutting corners by building the driveway this way? Quite frankly, yes. But we’re willing to make the compromise, and would rather spend the $3,000 on landscaping or furniture.

Thanks for the informative post with actual numbers and everything, in this one post everything we have ever complained of has been explained. P&A are willing to forgoe aesthetics to save $3k on a $1m home. What’s that phrase–you can’t buy taste?

Back in my youth in Florida driveways were often only partially paved — usually just two tire strips going up to the carport.

That clearly won’t work here, but I wonder about the idea I had several weeks ago. Rather than paving ‘your’ part of the drive and leaving the city’s portion sand and shell, why don’t you consider stripes of concrete alternating with stripes of sand and shell for most of the drive?

I think that would look better and manage the water better as well. Ken Goldberg, you know more about Florida paving than I do, what do you think?

P&A – I urge you to do the whole driveway, if you do any of it, and include the pipe. Use fewer plants if you must to save some money (after all, the plants will be washed away in a hurricane while the driveway won’t). While I am certainly not a fan of big houses, or spending a million dollars building a house, I do believe that if you do spend that kind of money, you don’t want an unfinished driveway.

Besides the fact that it will look cheap and awful and you will always have potholes where it meets the street paving and your driveway paving, you spent $7000 on a stove. Do the right thing here. Have some integrity for your new community.

I’ve been reading this blog since its inception and I have been amazed at the liberty people have taken with their comments. Million dollar homes are the “norm” in this area of Florida, saving 3 grand IS a big deal and I think they’ve come up with a good solution. They can fix it later when they have some equity. Questioning someone’s “taste” because they choose to save money is just wrong. By the way, P and A, I think your home is beautiful. You”ve done an incredible job!

I’ve long been disappointed with the lack of any attempt to make “green” choices – so many readers have given very sound advice – almost all of which has been ignored. They chose $7000 worth of light fixtures in one go, bought a $7000 range – and spent god knows what on a roof deck for someone who is afraid of heights –
now when they are faced with spending $3000 for proper drainage they balk – perhaps if the proposed drainage pipe was visible, they’d be all over the idea. It appears that A&P only want to spend money on things that they can show off.

There’s nothing wrong with questioning someone’s taste when that person put their taste up for display and comment. And it most definitely displays bad taste to scrimp on a driveway while splurging on so many other finishings. It reminds me of that scene in Silence of the Lambs where Clarice is called out on her combination of expensive brand name purse and cheap shoes. Also, as someone stated above, it’s time to do the right thing for the community and finish the driveway properly.

“Are we cutting corners by building the driveway this way? Quite frankly, yes.”

Understanding that it’s a lot easier to spend other people’s money than your own, I would reconsider your current tack and go for the solution that drains properly and looks proper for your million dollar home. While the pavers would be the best and concrete would be okay, though this pave-only-our-property-no-drain-pipe “solution” sounds pretty sneaky…and cheap looking.

It seems like you’ve already made your decision so I won’t belabor it. Too bad (again).

@deebee: Are you sure you’ve been reading this diary/faux-blog since the beginning? Your “Questioning someone’s ‘taste’ because they choose to save money is just wrong” comment seems highly out of context with this diary.

The authors have the penny-wise & pound-foolish thing down pat and this is just the latest example of their modus operandi.

Ms. Davis and Mr. Brown would probably appreciate proper drainage but I’d bet, given their style so far, they’ll skip spending the money up front to do the forward-thinking thing and instead just buy a big SUV to navigate the post-rainstorm lake in front of their house and then say something silly like “it’s a hybrid SUV, so we’re doing our part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.“

Why not save more money and do the whole thing with sand and shell? Wouldn’t that faciliate natural drainage more? And, wouldn’t it be better than making the entrance to your home look like hodge podge lodge? Obviously, I agree with Lily, who said “There’s nothing wrong with questioning someone’s taste when that person put their taste up for display and comment.”

At first glance, this approach seems to violate the spirit, if not the letter, of the law. It seems that you are willing to spend plenty of money on things you care about (lights, appliances, roof deck, etc.), but when it comes to things that affect other people or the environment, you suddenly snap the wallet shut. The drainage requirements exist for a reason. I hope you will consider your responsibilities as a neighbor, landowner, and citizen before you make a final decision on this. If you really want to save money, go with Mike Miller’s landscaping plan, paint the underside of the deck instead of using lattice, shop around before you buy fixtures, and maybe even go for the crushed shell driveway.

I am just astounded that after splurging on so many things in your house, you’ll try to save $3,000 on the first thing that anyone visiting your home will ever see or touch. And that you’ll turn your front yard into a stereotypical Florida Trailer Park by paving half your driveway. Of all the places to try to save money…

gil – I haven’t posted them yet. I’m still sifting through the extensive library of pictures to tell a coherent story (hey! I’m and editor!) The best pictures — the ones that have the finished kitchen counters — are still in my camera. I don’t have the hardware necessary to do the downloads; Husband took them with him on his business trip. He returns Thursday, and I hope to have pictures up at least by end of the weekend.

Without weighing in on questions of taste or personality, I can see how a $3,000 saving can be meaningful at this stage of the game.

My allowance for lighting was $2,000. Turns out that to do middle of the road quality stuff for the whole house will take closer to $8,000. I can whittle that down to $5,000 by putting some things off, and going for lower grades in closets, etc. But no matter how I look at it, I end up $3,000 over budget.

Towards the end of the project, when the total amount adds up and the interest payments on the construction loan climb, $3,000 can really make a difference. Before I did this, I, too, would look at the equation as “on a house of this cost, a few more thousand isn’t worth quibbling over.” The problem is that there are hundreds of these little costs over the life of the project. And for a first timer, this doesn’t really sink in until the end, when the amounts get one’s attention.

Husband and I made a vow to ourselves that we would not skimp on “bones,” and drainage is something I put high on the “bones” list. Everyone has to decide for themselves where their priorities are.

We can disagree with P&A’s priorities, but the decisions they’re facing, and the reasoning they’re using, are not at all unusual, imho.

My question is a practical one (though I agree that this won’t look great and does seem to be honing the the letter of the law and not the spirit). Won’t the shells creep onto the paved part and eventually, cause damage to the paving? I would think this would cause a potential maintenance issue–which is far more annoying (and potentially costly) to deal with later than doing it right to begin with.
I remember when my m-i-l built a vacation house–she skimped on the size of the kitchen and omitted the second bedroom (opting for a loft). she built the second bedroom within 18 months at twice the cost of doing it at initial construction. Fixing the kitchen has never occurred, but she fusses about it still…

What continues to be a frustration for me (quite consistent with the ongoing nature of this “blog”) is the lack of any context or connection with the other decisions that have been made. I do imagine that as the finish line comes in site, and the nickels and dimes have been added up, that financial concerns have to be balanced against form, and even function in this case. All new furniture and furnishings are on the horizon too! But we don’t have any real reference for this, except in limited exposure to activities like the landscaping project.

We get bits and pieces, but no overall sense of how any decision fits into the project as a whole, or into the expectations P&A had going in, at the midpoint, and now near the end, and how these have evolved. It would be helpful to others contemplating a similar construction activity to know the cost items that were not included in the original plan (security system, landscaping, drainage) or that ended up materially different in cost than expected (swimming pool, kitchen?, fixtures?), as well as those that were accurately reflected at the outset.

As a process, the landscaping process seems indicitative of much that could have been done differently if we are coming to the point where $3,000 needed to get the optimal aesthetic and functional connection to the street (and to introduce your dream home to friends and neighbors)is being deferred. As I recall, the landscape plan was initiated by providing the designer with a wish list and no discussion of budget parameters. When the plan came back at $22,000 the response was “can we cut 25% of plants to cut 25% of cost”, which doesn’t work because of some of the fixed costs of site prep, but we are still left hoping but not expecting to come in at $15,000.

A more comprehensive framing of what could have been done differently, where more advanced planning or more competitive biding could have been used would be helpful as we wonder how P&A arrive at the point where this $3,000 is not viable.

Geoffrey…trailer trash?! Now that’s getting a little bit rude, LOL
… but let us not speculate on the state of finances leading to this idiotic and irresponsible (as noted by poster above who states that the drainage regulation exists for a reason) decision to save $3k!! Cheers-

Carol, you make a good point. I feel the drainage pipe is something that should have been treated as a structural/construction item that should have been done as part of the house build. I have done things at my house upon moving in that were not glamourous or even showed, I had the chimney pointed, chimney liner installed, new electric service; the aesthetics can wait. You can always economize on some items and upgrade later – light fixtures, counters, faucets, etc. In P & A’s case; after flaunting the purchase of an expensive range, ice maker and wine cooler; it’s a little foolish to make a stink about something the city is mandating for water control. I am currently trying to direct my downspouts to yard areas to avoid the rain running off into the street and the sewers.

If you are going to do the partial paving plan, I would ask John if he is sure the city will be satisfied with this plan. Or go ask the city yourself. Just because it has been done before is no guarantee that it is code compliant.

What's Next

About

They've found an idyllic tiny town in Florida, they've bought a piece of land and now Paul B. Brown and Alison Davis are setting out to build their dream house. How hard can it be, they wonder, even though they live 1,500 miles away, they've never built a home before and they don't know anything about architects, builders, local zoning laws or financing? On this blog for Great Homes, they recount their successes and failures and will chronicle their adventures to come.